: Oh my! Are we now to deal with the "objectivist" ethics of Ayn Rand? The virtues of selfishness in defense of capitalism? : On one thing we can rest assured. This one sided interpretation of human behavior will never fly except for those who are personally committed to an ideology that justifies their own particular penchant for defining self-worth by possessions. But let's hear it for their slogan: "Individualists Unite!"
: What are we to make of roughly two million years of human evolution in which hunter-gatherer tribes resided in more or less collectivist societies? When was man suddenly endowed with property rights? For Rand and the objectivists, while pretending to derive such rights from "objective reason" in other places (see below) they seems to be a "metaphysical" inheritance.
:
: But let's go to her for her concept of values and how "property rights" are derived -culled from some "objectivist" sites:
: STEP ONE
: "Value," Rand said, "is that which one acts to gain and/or keep." (Reference: "The Objectivist Ethics,". Values are thus the means to sustaining life: that which furthers life is a value, and is the good; that which harms or destroys life is a disvalue, and is bad or evil. Thus selfishness -- using one's own reason to further one's own life -- is the only moral theory compatible with man's life as the standard of value. Selfishness entails several virtues, or principles of moral action, the most basic of which is rationality."
: STEP TWO
: While individual value-choices -- such as type of career or favorite foods -- vary from individual to individual, the basic ethical principles governing all human action do not: they are a part of each man's metaphysical nature, [whatever that is!] and must be practiced on a daily basis -- if one's goal is the preservation of one's own life.
: STEP THREE
: Politics is the application of morality to living among other men. This morality is based on a concept of individual rights which sanction individual autonomous action. "Ša man must be left free to live his own life, so long as he leaves others free to do the same. The most fundamental right is the right to life, and the right to property is its practical implementation. (Reference: "Man's Rights", The Virtue of Selfishness)
: -------------------------
: Well what are we left with. This is, of course, an egoist philosophy - readily admitted by the followers of objectivism. It may appeal to those preoccupied with their own naval, but finds tough going in the real world.
: Problems with this philosophy arise when behavior reaches certain real-world limits. For example, I offer the following two "thought experiments":
: 1.
: Suppose an oil company decides it can make a greater profit by constructing its oil tankers with a single rather than double hull? Should it be permitted to travel through - say Prince William Sound? Should they be subject to governmental regulation? Do the people have a right to bar entry into its port?
: 2.
: Suppose I own about 200 thousand acres which include a large watershed. The people in the valley below have used the water from my land for years in growing their subsistence crops. I have decided to cut all the timber and divert the remaining water through a projected hydro-electric facility. There will no longer be water available to the several hundred farms in the valley. Do I have a right to proceed? Why not? (BTW this is not an entirely made up case!)
: But hey! keep up the defense of capitalism. If it doesn't generate debate, at least it's good for a laugh!
: bill
Right on observations, Bill. I'd just like to point out the glaring contradiction of an 'objective' philosophy that is also 'moral.'
This CP person is more revealling in his or her ellipses than in his or her noise. For example, SDF's eloquent explanation of use- and exchange-value went unanswered while at another of SDF's posts, CP has the arrogance to say 'I can't be bothered to explain economic to you.' This is the ripe Rand stuff!
None.
